Laptop Computers

Lynne Featherstone: To ask the Prime Minister how many laptop computers have been used by (a) Ministers, (b) special advisers and (c) officials in his Office in each year since 1995; how many have been (i) lost and (ii) stolen in that period; what the cost was of the use of laptops in that period; and if he will make a statement.

Tony Blair: For these purposes my office forms part of the Cabinet Office. I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to her by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (Mr. Hutton) today.

Consultants

Janet Dean: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what plans she has to issue guidance on effective commissioning for those in the public and voluntary sectors who are commissioning work from external consultants.

David Lammy: I refer my hon. Friend to the answer given to her on 27 June 2005, Official Report, column 1286W by my hon. Friend the Financial Secretary to the Treasury (John Healey).

Women's Football

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if she will take steps to promote women's football in England.

Richard Caborn: The Government has sought to help promote the women's game by working closely with the football authorities and other sporting organisations to raise its profile in this country.
	Sport England on behalf of the Government funds the Football Foundation which invests in a wide range of projects that benefit women's football. Sport England has also directly funded girls' football in recent years through the Active Sports programme which has contributed to the 53 per cent. increase in the number of girls playing the game since 2001.
	The Government places much importance on women's football and football in general. The sport is a key deliverer of our aims to increase participation in sport, improve social inclusion, community cohesion and the health of the nation.

Energy Technology List (Kilns)

Joan Walley: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will take steps to include kilns on the Energy Technology List of the Enhanced Capital Allowance Scheme; and if she will make a statement.

Elliot Morley: The Carbon Trust is responsible for providing Government with technical advice on technologies for the Energy Technology List (ETL). Each proposal for a new technology group is considered and prioritised based on the potential to save carbon dioxide emissions and ease of incorporation within the scheme. To date we have not received any detailed or quantitative proposals to include kilns on the ETL from the relevant industry representatives and our own market assessment indicates that kilns offer relatively low EGA accessible abatement potential compared to other technologies not yet listed. Therefore we have no plans to undertake a detailed evaluation of kilns for the ETL at the moment.

HIV/AIDS (Africa)

Nigel Evans: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what discussions he has had with Ministers in recipient countries in relation to HIV/AIDS aid in sub-Saharan Africa.

Hilary Benn: Over the past few months my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State and I have met with Ministers and others in a number of African countries to discuss ways of doing more to fight HIV and AIDS prevention, provide better treatment and care, improve and encourage research into protective microbicides and vaccines.

User Fees (Education)

Ann McKechin: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what steps his Department is taking to ensure that user fees for education are abolished in all countries not on track to meet the millennium development goals.

Gareth Thomas: DFID supports Governments to develop education policies that reduce the financial burden of education for poor families. In Kenya, the recent removal of user fees resulted in over 1 million extra children going to school. We will continue to support countries not on track to meet the education Millennium Development Goals in their efforts to remove user fees for basic education. Over the next three years, DFID plans to spend £1.4 billion supporting education in developing countries. Removing school fees must be part of a plan to ensure the quality of primary education for children is improved.

Fossil Fuels (International Funding)

Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development how much has been invested in (a) fossil fuel projects and (b) renewable energy projects by the (i) World Bank Group, (ii) European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, (iii) European Investment Bank, (iv) Asian Development Bank, (v) African Development Bank and (vi) Inter American Development Bank in each of the last five years.

Hilary Benn: holding answer 23 June 2005
	The following summary table details investment in fossil fuel and renewable energy projects across the major multilateral development banks in the last five years.
	
		Multilateral development bank renewable energy and fossil fuel investments: financial year 2000–04 US$ million
		
			 Sub-sector 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 
		
		
			 World Bank Group  
			 Renewable energy 764 26 349 342 272 
			 Coal (incl mine closure) 51 111 194 75 160 
			 Oil and gas 490 592 601 448 415 
			 Power 1,163 1,169 1,555 852.2 570.2 
			 Other energy sub-sector 176 175 55 170 128 
			 Total fossil fuel 1,880 2,047 2,405 1,545 1,273 
			 Energy efficiency and district heating 254 189 37 68 48 
			   
			 European Bank for Reconstruction and Development  
			 Renewable energy 0 16 0 0 0 
			 Coal (incl mine closure) 0 0 0 72 0 
			 Oil and gas 142 27 153 35 124 
			 Total fossil fuel 142 27 153 108 124 
			 Energy efficiency and district heating 21 64 92 121 242 
			   
			 European Investment Bank  
			 Renewable energy 78 206 734 375 459 
			 Coal (incl mine closure) n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 Oil and gas n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 Total fossil fuel 285 285 285 285 669 
			 Energy efficiency and district heating n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			   
			 Asian Development Bank  
			 Renewable energy 58 6 161 0 0 
			 Coal (incl mine closure) 0 0 0 0 187 
			 Oil and gas 0 0 73 0 0 
			 Total fossil fuel 0 0 73 0 187 
			 Energy efficiency and district heating n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			   
			 African Development Bank  
			 Renewable energy 102 79 2 0 0 
			 Coal (incl mine closure) 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Oil and gas 0 0 115 82 0 
			 Total fossil fuel 0 0 115 82 0 
			 Energy efficiency and district heating n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			   
			 Inter-American Development Bank  
			 Renewable energy 338 186 3 14 75 
			 Coal (incl mine closure) 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Oil and gas 713 192 0 0 0 
			 Total fossil fuel 713 192 0 0 0 
			 Energy efficiency and district heating n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. Figures shown are commitment amounts and not disbursements.
	2. Renewable energy is generally defined as hydropower, wind, solar, geothermal and biomass projects.
	3. Sub-sector project definitions may vary across institutions and are not directly comparable.
	4. Although projects are in fossil fuel sector, this does not necessarily imply a net increase in fossil fuel use. More efficient fossil fuel investments will displace other inefficient fuel or production methods.
	5. Coal projects include costs to close mines in an environmental and socially acceptable manner.
	6. Figures excludes sole technical assistance projects although technical assistance is a component of loans described.
	7. Figures exclude projects solely to support power transmission and distribution.
	8. World Bank renewable energy projects include IBRD/IDA/IFC commitments, MIGA guarantees, Bank GEF projects and IBRD carbon finance.
	9. EIB investments are for EU members, and also two projects in Swaziland and Morocco.
	10. ADB, AfDB, EIB and IDB energy efficiency project information not shown in table.
	11. The energy efficiency component of EBRD industrial projects was not recorded before 2002.
	12. EBRD and EIB lending figures converted to US$ at $ per Euro 1.205.
	13. AfDB figures converted from Unit of Account to US$ at $ per UA 1.4752.
	14. IDB loans include loan amounts placed by IDB Private Sector Department with other lenders.
	15. IDB renewable energy includes investment in cogeneration facilities.

Flight Charges (African Development)

Alistair Carmichael: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what discussions EU finance ministers have had on introducing additional charges on domestic and international flights to fund international development in Africa; what the UK's position is; and if he will make a statement.

Ivan Lewis: holding answer 20 June 2005
	EU finance minister discussions on innovative mechanisms for financing development, including the IFF, the IFF for Immunisation, and an air ticket levy that could support specific development projects and refinance the IFF, are on-going.
	The 16–17 June European Council invited "the Council to pursue its consideration of the most promising options for innovative sources of funding for development, so as to increase the resources available in a sustainable and predictable manner."

Home Owners

Sarah Teather: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer pursuant to the Answer of 9 June 2005, Official Report, column 681W, on home ownership, what economic analysis was undertaken to underpin the target of one million more homeowners by 2010.

John Healey: The Government expect one million people to enter home-ownership over the next five years. This is based upon analysis of recent trends in house-building and new owner-occupiers. It also takes into account the impact that the domestic economic stability delivered by the Government's macroeconomic framework will have had on numbers entering into homeownership.

Air Services/Travel

Greg Hands: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what estimate he has made of how many extra aircraft (a) per day and (b) per night would (i) fly in and out of Heathrow airport and (ii) pass over Hammersmith and Fulham if the third runway is built at Heathrow.

Karen Buck: Assessments of the additional capacity of Heathrow airport with a short third runway were made in connection with the preparation of the Air Transport White Paper and are set out in the supporting paper "Passenger Forecasts—Additional Analysis" available on the DfT website. It is not possible to be specific about how many additional daily flights would pass over Hammersmith and Fulham, since arrival and departure patterns are subject to air traffic control and meteorological conditions. Night-time traffic would be constrained by the night flying restrictions applying at the time at Heathrow.

Air Services/Travel

Vincent Cable: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many passengers transferred or transited at Heathrow between (a) two overseas destinations and (b) an overseas destination and a UK destination in each of the last five years.

Karen Buck: The following table shows passengers transferred at Heathrow between two overseas destinations, an overseas destination and a UK destination in each of the last five years.
	
		Transfer and transit passengers at Heathrow 2000–04 Million
		
			  2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 
		
		
			 Transfer  
			 International to International 13.7 13.7 16.4 16.4 17.3 
			 International to Domestic 2.8 2.7 3.0 3.1 3.0 
			 Domestic to International 2.4 2.3 2.9 3.4 2.9 
			   
			 Transit  
			 International to International 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2

Road Schemes

Francis Maude: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how much was spent on (a) capital projects, (b) maintenance and (c) improvement schemes on (i) motorways and (ii) trunk roads in (A) West Sussex, (B) Kent, (C) Durham, (D) East Riding of Yorkshire and (E) each English county in each of the last eight years.

Stephen Ladyman: The information cannot be provided as records are not readily available in the format requested and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

Housing Allowances

Jim Cousins: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will list flat rate housing allowances in each of the allowance pilot areas; what uprating methods are used for each allowance; and how many claimants of each flat rate allowance there are in each pilot area.

James Plaskitt: Local housing allowance rates are set according to broad rental market areas and the number of rooms a claimant is eligible to have under the size criteria.
	Local housing allowance rates are reviewed monthly by The Rent Service and the amount of local housing allowance payable is the rate that applies at the date of claim for benefit. Local housing allowance is awarded for one year unless a relevant change of circumstances occurs and triggers an earlier review.
	The information is in the tables.
	
		Local housing allowance (LHA) rate in Pathfinder areas, by broad market rental area (BRMA) and by type of LHA—June 2005 £ per week
		
			 Pathfinder area—BRMA Shared room rate 2 rooms 3 rooms 4 rooms 5 rooms 6 rooms 
		
		
			 Blackpool—Fylde 50 77.5 102.5 110 127.5 149 
			 Brighton and Hove 70 130 171 208 237 276 
			 Conwy—North coast 42.5 69 87 98 109 126 
			 Conwy—North rural 40 63 74 82 85 107 
			 Conwy—Menai 42.5 68 85 101 109 115 
			 Coventry 50 92 107 110 121 139 
			 Edinburgh—North 62 104 130 159 194 231 
			 Edinburgh—East 62 101 130 159 200 237 
			 Edinburgh—Central 69 115 147 190 248 306 
			 Edinburgh—South 62 104 133 161 202 237 
			 Leeds 50 83.5 101 113 123.5 137.5 
			 Lewisham—LSE Central 78 155 208 235 280 355 
			 Lewisham—LSE Inner 85 195 235 295 360 425 
			 NE Lincolnshire 43.5 62.5 80 87.5 90 97.5 
			 Teignbridge—Teign 61 87 113 131 150 160 
			 Teignbridge—Exeter 60 101 127 148 165 205 
			 Teignbridge—Tiverton and Crediton 58 84 107 127 149 163 
			 Teignbridge—Torbay 63 95 120 136 150 165 
			 Teignbridge—South Devon 59 93 118 133 153 162 
			 Teignbridge—Plymouth Environs 58 89 104 121 133 153 
		
	
	Source:
	Data provided by The Rent Service, June 2005.
	
		Number of claimants by local housing allowance type in each pathfinder area—November 2004
		
			  Shared room rate 2 rooms 3 rooms 4 rooms 5 rooms 6 plus rooms All 
		
		
			 Blackpool 690 3,740 1,790 400 500 210 7,320 
			 Brighton and Hove 1,580 3,690 1,760 340 220 110 7,690 
			 Conwy 170 880 400 80 90 40 1,660 
			 Coventry 410 970 860 180 280 120 2,830 
			 Edinburgh 870 2,110 1,800 330 300 130 5,520 
			 Leeds 980 1,660 1,140 240 350 200 4,570 
			 Lewisham 1,010 1,070 760 190 210 90 3,340 
			 North East Lincolnshire 330 1,400 1,350 330 380 140 3,940 
			 Teignbridge 140 660 420 110 90 (6)— 1,440 
			 All 6,170 16,180 10,270 2,200 2,430 1,060 38,300 
		
	
	(6) Nil or negligible.
	Note:
	Figures are rounded to the nearest 10 and may not sum due to rounding.
	Source:
	DWP administrative data for Pathfinder data November 2004.

Housing Benefit

Paul Goodman: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what percentage of housing benefit claimants rent from the private sector in each of the housing benefit Pathfinder areas.

James Plaskitt: The information is in the table.
	
		Housing benefit private tenants(7) by Pathfinder—February 2005
		
			Local authorityAll private(7) tenants Percentage of total housing benefit recipients that are private(7) tenants 
		
		
			 Blackpool 9,100 62.1 
			 Brighton and Hove 9,900 42.7 
			 Conwy 2,700 39.9 
			 Coventry 5,300 24.2 
			 Edinburgh 7,300 21.5 
			 Leeds 7,500 13.9 
			 Lewisham 5,200 18.2 
			 North East Lincoln 4,900 40.1 
			 Teignbridge 2,500 44.3 
		
	
	(7) Excluding registered social landlords.
	Notes:
	1. The data refers to benefit units, which may be a single person or a couple.
	2. The caseloads are rounded to the nearest hundred and percentages are given to one decimal place.
	3. Figures for any non-responding authorities have been estimated.
	4. Housing benefit figures exclude any extended payment cases.
	Source:
	Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit Management Information System Quarterly 100 per cent. caseload stock-count taken in February 2005.

Housing Benefit

Paul Goodman: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the average standard housing allowances are in each of the housing benefit pathfinder areas, broken down by household type.

James Plaskitt: The available information is in the table.
	
		Average local housing allowance amount for claimants in each Pathfinder area broken down by household type £ per week
		
			  Couple (under 60) with children Couple (under 60) no children Single (under 60) with children Single (under 60) no children Single pensioner Couple pensioner All 
		
		
			 Blackpool 114 79 105 72 75 79 86 
			 Brighton 193 127 176 106 117 130 129 
			 Conwy 96 71 89 62 65 68 73 
			 Coventry 119 91 107 73 79 89 92 
			 Edinburgh 171 111 147 94 99 114 120 
			 Leeds 119 84 109 72 77 88 88 
			 Lewisham 247 151 223 115 131 164 158 
			 North East Lincs 87 67 79 64 64 66 73 
			 Teignbridge 126 87 114 75 81 82 95 
			 All 144 94 129 88 89 91 105 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. Household status refers only to the claimant.
	2. Local housing allowance amount refers to the maximum amount a claimant is eligible to receive. The amount of benefit a claimant actually receives may differ because of their circumstances.
	3. Due to data concerns the table does not include the full local housing allowance caseload.
	Source:
	DWP administrative data for Pathfinder data November 2004, DWP income support data October and November 2004, DWP pension credit data Nov 2004, DWP jobseeker's allowance data Nov 2004.

Housing Benefit

Paul Goodman: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions 
	(1)  what the level of (a) fraud and (b) error in housing benefit payments was as a percentage of housing benefit expenditure in each year since 1997; and what sums were involved in each case in each year, broken down by (i) region and (ii) local authority area;
	(2)  what the total amount of overpayments of housing benefit was in each year since 1997, broken down by region.

James Plaskitt: The Department has undertaken continuous measurement of housing benefit fraud and error since 2002–03. The latest available headline information was published in the report "Fraud and Error in Housing Benefit, April 2002 to March 2004, Part One" on 24 February 2005.
	Information is not available at local authority level. Information at regional level is contained within the supplementary report, "Fraud and Error in Housing Benefit, April 2002 to March 2004, Part Two", which was published on 26th May 2005.
	Both reports are in the Library.

Housing Benefit

Jim Cousins: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the average housing benefit payment in each housing authority area in the North East was in November (a) 2000, (b) 2001, (c) 2002, (d) 2003 and (e) 2004.

James Plaskitt: The information is in the table.
	
		Average weekly amount of housing benefit in north-east local authorities: November 2000 to 2004 £
		
			  2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 
		
		
			 North East GOR 40.19 42.36 45.78 45.06 47.68 
			 Alnwick 37.26 38.64 40.56 42.46 43.72 
			 Berwick upon Tweed 36.27 38.66 40.14 42.25 43.78 
			 Blyth Valley 35.83 37.65 40.16 40.63 41.84 
			 Castle Morpeth 37.67 39.60 41.61 44.73 46.05 
			 Chester le Street 36.61 38.68 40.73 41.70 45.29 
			 Darlington 43.08 46.20 51.02 49.51 51.91 
			 Derwentside 41.34 44.37 43.49 43.69 46.27 
			 Durham 37.78 39.70 43.23 42.96 45.70 
			 Easington 36.08 38.45 40.20 40.81 44.53 
			 Gateshead 36.46 39.44 41.96 43.67 45.11 
			 Hartlepool 42.31 44.76 46.73 47.26 49.57 
			 Middlesbrough 45.76 48.15 51.55 50.75 52.87 
			 Newcastle upon Tyne 43.29 45.69 51.22 47.80 49.82 
			 North Tyneside 38.64 41.33 46.90 45.22 47.11 
			 Redcar and Cleveland 41.98 43.52 45.52 48.25 50.92 
			 Sedgefield 37.44 39.62 42.56 43.42 45.73 
			 South Tyneside 38.23 37.47 38.46 35.91 42.41 
			 Stockton on Tees 42.11 44.49 47.22 47.01 50.15 
			 Sunderland 41.47 44.12 50.03 47.10 49.91 
			 Teesdale 41.53 43.08 45.11 45.39 46.64 
			 Tynedale 38.41 41.46 43.99 45.79 47.14 
			 Wansbeck 33.14 35.10 36.79 38.96 40.25 
			 Wear Valley 39.15 41.10 45.45 45.34 46.85 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. The data refers to benefit units which may be a single person, couple or family.
	2. The figures are shown to the nearest penny.
	3. Figures for any non-responding authorities have been estimated.
	4. Housing benefit figures exclude any extended payment cases.
	Source:
	Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit Management Information System Quarterly 100 per cent. caseload stock-count taken November 2000 to 2004.

Unemployment Levels

David Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions 
	(1)  what estimate he has made of the effect on levels of unemployment since 1997 of (a) the new deal and (b) Jobcentre Plus initiatives; and if he will make a statement;
	(2)  what his estimate is of the effect of the new deal on the claimant count for unemployment; and if he will make a statement.

Margaret Hodge: The development of Jobcentre Plus is building on the high quality service already provided by social security offices and Jobcentres. The new offices deliver a single, integrated service with a clear focus on work to all people of working age. As a result of a strong economy and our active labour market policies, we have record levels of employment and the lowest sustained levels of unemployment for 30 years. The new deal has helped well over a million people to find jobs, and is giving people in all areas of the country the help and support they need to move off benefits and into work.
	The Jobcentre Plus client base has changed considerably over the past few years. Since May 1997 claimant unemployment has roughly halved and, as at April 2005, the UK claimant count stands at 839,400, down 782,200 (48 per cent.) since the 1997 election. The claimant unemployment rate is 2.7 per cent.; down 2.7 percentage points since the 1997 election.
	ILO unemployment in the UK stands at 1.40 million (January-March 2005), down 654,000 (32 per cent.) since the 1997 election. The ILO unemployment rate is 4.7 per cent. down 2.5 percentage points since the 1997 election.
	The number of lone parents on benefit is down 20 per cent. to 763,000. Youth claimant unemployment has fallen by two-fifths, to its lowest level for 30 years; the number of 18 to 24-year-old claimants unemployed for more than a year has fallen by over 90 per cent.; and long-term adult unemployment (two year plus) has been cut by three quarters to its lowest level for 30 years.

DirectGov

Rosie Cooper: To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster if he will make a statement on the launch of the DirectGov internet portal for Government services.

Jim Murphy: I refer the hon. Member to the response I gave the hon. Member for Loughborough (Mr. Reed) on 28 June 2005 (ref: 7323).

European Parliament

Graham Brady: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs pursuant to the oral answer, of 21 June 2005, Official Report, column 653, on European Union (finances), whether it is his Department's policy that the European Parliament should continue to meet in Strasbourg; and if he will make a statement.

Douglas Alexander: holding answer 27 June 2005
	Strasbourg was chosen as a site for the European Parliament (EP) in 1958, well before the UK joined the EU. It was chosen as a symbol of Franco-German reconciliation. While the Government believe that the splitting of the EP's sites is far from ideal, any change to the status quo would need the unanimous agreement of all 25 member states. That looks unlikely for the foreseeable future.

Uzbekistan

Greg Hands: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what visits the UK ambassador in Tashkent has made to (a) Andijan and (b) the Fergana Valley since 17 May.

Douglas Alexander: David Moran, our ambassador to Tashkent, has made two visits to Andizhan (Andijan) since 17 May 2005.
	The first was on 18 May. when he accompanied a group of diplomats, members of international organisations and the media. Mr. Moran's lobbying had been instrumental in prompting the Uzbek authorities to organise this visit. The event was tightly controlled, and Mr. Moran was unable to engage members of the public. Having pressed Uzbek Deputy Foreign Minister Nematov on these restrictions. Mr. Moran secured agreement that he and EU colleagues could return unaccompanied.
	On 26 and 27 May, Mr. Moran returned to Andizhan. He visited the central Yangi bazaar, and the city's central square. There was a high security service presence, and members of the public appeared afraid to approach Mr. Moran. He had a similar experience at the Kyrgyz border near Pakhtaabad. and at the border town of Karasu. This represented a distinct change from public behaviour in early May. when people had gathered around the visiting Defence Attaché's car. and asked him to pass news of events in Andizhan outside Uzbekistan.

Uzbekistan

David Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what recent discussions (a) he and (b) his officials have had with those conducting the investigations into the Andijan uprising.

Douglas Alexander: In late May 2005. Uzbek President Karimov responded to repeated calls for an independent, international inquiry by creating a Parliamentary Committee to investigate the events of 12–13 May in Andizhan (Andijan), inviting diplomats from the US, France, Russia, China and Uzbekistan's regional neighbours to observe its work. On 13 June, at the General Affairs External Relations Council (GAERC), we and our EU partners rejected Karimov's proposal, and reaffirmed our call for an independent international investigation, giving a deadline of 30 June. In view of this, we have made no attempt to contact the Uzbek Parliamentary Committee.
	We are. however, continuing to monitor closely the situation in Andizhan. Members of staff from the British Embassy, Tashkent, have visited the area five times since 13 May. We are also aware of the reports published by the US-based NGO Human Rights Watch, and the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe's (OSCE) Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR), which suggest that the Uzbek authorities used indiscriminate and disproportionate force in Andizhan. These reports, which include interviews with eye witnesses now on the Kyrgyz side of the border, further underline the need for a comprehensive, international and independent inquiry in Uzbekistan.

Crime Reporting

Lady Hermon: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what research has been carried out by his Department into the change in the level of non-reporting of crime in Northern Ireland in the last five years; and if he will make a statement.

David Hanson: Change in the level of reporting of crime in Northern Ireland is most frequently measured by the Northern Ireland Crime Survey (NICS), the most recent published results for which relate to the 1998, 2001 and 2003–04 sweeps. In addition, the 2000 International Crime Victim Survey (ICVS) compared crime reporting rates across 17 industrialised countries or regions, including Northern Ireland.
	Although, typically, less than half of crime is reported to the police, Northern Ireland tends to have a higher reporting rate than England and Wales and it had the highest rate of all countries participating in the 2000 ICVS. Reporting rates can fluctuate for a number of reasons, including, changes in the level or mix of crime occurring or in the level of confidence in the police and the wider criminal justice system.
	Information from the NICS and ICVS on the levels of crime reported to the police is contained within the Northern Ireland Office Research and Statistical Bulletins 1/2001 "International Crime Victimisation Survey 2000: Key Findings for Northern Ireland" and 4/2005 "Crime Victimisation in Northern Ireland: Findings from the 2003/04 Northern Ireland Crime Survey", copies of which are available from the House of Commons library. The bulletins can also be downloaded from the internet (http://www.nio.gov.uk/index/statistics-research/publications.htm).

Religious Hatred Prosecutions

Lady Hermon: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many successful prosecutions there have been in Northern Ireland under the prevention of incitement to religious hatred legislation since its introduction in 1987.

David Hanson: Data prior to 1993 is not available; data beyond 2003 will be available later in 2005.
	During the period 1993 to 2003, there were no prosecutions for incitement to religious hatred. There was one prosecution and subsequent conviction for distributing written material to incite hatred.

Voting (General Election)

Lady Hermon: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what estimate he has made of the number of disabled voters in each parliamentary constituency in Northern Ireland who were unable to vote at the general election as a result of access restrictions at polling stations.

David Hanson: This is an operational matter and is the responsibility of the Chief Electoral Officer who is writing to the hon. Member. The text of the letter reads:
	"The Electoral Office has no indication that significant numbers of disabled electors were unable to vote on 5 May because of access restrictions at polling stations. While we do seek to ensure that every polling place is readily accessible by all electors and have, for some time, been working with the Equality Commission and owners of property to encourage compliance with the Disability Discrimination Act, adjustments take time. In the interim, we do keep the polling station scheme under constant review and encourage anyone with local knowledge who may be aware of more suitable premises to put forward their ideas. In addition, as you know a public consultation exercise on the scheme was carried out earlier this year and all comments received were taken into account before finalising arrangements for this year's elections".
	A copy of the letter will be placed in the Library.

Affordable Housing

Anthony Steen: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister 
	(1)  how much social housing grant has been allocated in Devon in each of the last five years; and what proportion was in support of section 106 schemes in each year;
	(2)  how much the Housing Corporation has allocated for the provision of affordable housing for each district in Devon in each of the last five years.

Yvette Cooper: holding answer 27 June 2005
	Expenditure on affordable housing in Devon provided through the Housing Corporation broken down by local authority, in the last five years, is detailed in the following tables. The programmes included in the table are the Approved Development Programme (ADP), the Local Authority Social Housing Grant (LASHG) and Transitional LASHG, the Safer Communities Supported Housing Fund (SCSHF), and the Starter Home Initiative (SHI).
	The amount supporting section 106 is only available for 2004–05. The total proportion for Devon is 14 per cent.
	
		Breakdown by local authority in Devon for the last five years2000–01 £ million
		
			  ADP LASHG SCSHF SHI Total 
		
		
			 East Devon 0.486 0.431 0.000 0.000 0.917 
			 Exeter 2.279 1.017 0.000 0.000 3.296 
			 Mid Devon 0.735 0.546 0.000 0.000 1.280 
			 North Devon 1.052 1.130 0.000 0.000 2.181 
			 Plymouth 3.103 0.235 0.000 0.000 3.339 
			 South Hams 0.446 1.830 0.000 0.000 2.275 
			 Teignbridge 1.618 0.386 0.000 0.000 2.004 
			 Torbay 1.176 0.487 0.000 0.000 1.664 
			 Torridge 0.447 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.450 
			 West Devon 0.513 0.544 0.000 0.000 1.057 
			 Devon Total 11.854 6.609 0.000 0.000 18.462 
		
	
	
		2001–02 £ million
		
			  ADP LASHG SCSHF SHI Total 
		
		
			 East Devon 0.990 0.587 0.053 0.000 1.630 
			 Exeter 1.438 1.628 0.145 0.000 3.212 
			 Mid Devon 0.592 0.218 0.000 0.000 0.810 
			 North Devon 0.276 0.129 0.127 0.000 0.532 
			 Plymouth 3.754 0.587 0.000 0.000 4.341 
			 South Hams 0.402 1.251 0.000 0.000 1.653 
			 Teignbridge 1.429 0.318 0.000 0.000 1.747 
			 Torbay 1.640 0.308 0.032 0.000 1.980 
			 Torridge 0.424 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.424 
			 West Devon 0.402 0.648 0.000 0.000 1.050 
			 Devon Total 11.347 5.673 0.357 0.000 17.378 
		
	
	
		2002–03 £ million
		
			  ADP LASHG SCSHF SHI Total 
		
		
			 East Devon 1.075 1.801 0.026 0.000 2.902 
			 Exeter 1.891 1.376 0.873 0.032 4.171 
			 Mid Devon 1.018 0.185 0.000 0.000 1.203 
			 North Devon 1.326 3.115 0.057 0.000 4.498 
			 Plymouth 4.330 0.324 0.000 0.000 4.654 
			 South Hams 0.849 1.644 0.000 0.000 2.493 
			 Teignbridge 0.832 0.342 0.000 0.000 1.174 
			 Torbay 1.593 0.543 0.613 0.011 2.760 
			 Torridge 0.610 0.112 0.022 0.000 0.745 
			 West Devon 0.958 0.795 0.000 0.000 1.753 
			 Devon Total 14.481 10.237 1.591 0.042 26.351 
		
	
	
		2003–04 £ million
		
			  ADP LASHG SCSHF SHI Total 
		
		
			 East Devon 0.715 2.012 0.143 0.000 2.871 
			 Exeter 3.218 3.198 0.650 0.175 7.241 
			 Mid Devon 0.852 0.000 0.062 0.000 0.914 
			 North Devon 1.501 0.963 0.072 0.000 2.536 
			 Plymouth 8.807 0.000 0.033 0.000 8.840 
			 South Hams 1.466 3.252 0.344 0.000 5.062 
			 Teignbridge 2.280 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.280 
			 Torbay 3.950 0.000 0.565 0.062 4.576 
			 Torridge 0.970 0.000 0.039 0.000 1.009 
			 West Devon 1.673 1.473 0.000 0.000 3.146 
			 Devon Total 25.433 10.898 1.908 0.237 38.476 
		
	
	
		2004–05 £ million
		
			  ADP LASHG SCSHF SHI Total 
		
		
			 East Devon 0.518 0.256 0.008 0.000 0.781 
			 Exeter 3.147 0.287 0.173 0.021 3.627 
			 Mid Devon 1.778 0.000 0.054 0.000 1.832 
			 North Devon 1.834 0.618 0.136 0.000 2.588 
			 Plymouth 6.203 0.000 0.295 0.000 6.498 
			 South Hams 1.095 0.254 0.000 0.000 1.349 
			 Teignbridge 1.477 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.477 
			 Torbay 1.730 0.000 0.153 0.000 1.882 
			 Torridge 0.388 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.388 
			 West Devon 0.646 0.175 0.000 0.000 0.821 
			 Devon Total 18.815 1.590 0.818 0.021 21.244 
		
	
	Note:
	All data analysed by sponsoring local authority.
	Source:
	Housing Corporation.

Building Regulations

David Howarth: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what measures he plans to introduce to ensure full compliance with Part L of the Building Regulations; and whether they will include random pressure testing of new homes.

Yvette Cooper: holding answer 20 June 2005
	The Government are pursuing the commitments made in the Energy White Paper to raise the energy performance standards in the Building Regulations and to work with building control bodies to see how enforcement can be improved. After extensive consultations with stakeholders, the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister have developed proposals for improving technical standards, including sample pressure testing of new homes, and for simplifying the compliance processes. There will also be a programme of dissemination, training and supporting help desks to give every opportunity to become acquainted with the new provisions and so improve compliance.

HIP Energy Reports

Andrew Love: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what assessment has been made of the likely (a) switching in use of domestic fuel that will result from the proposed Housing Investment Programme energy reports and (b) environmental effects of the consequential change in external costs.

Yvette Cooper: The Government do not anticipate that there will be any significant switches in use of domestic fuel resulting directly from the proposed HIP energy reports. The energy reports will primarily provide information to a potential buyer on the energy efficiency of the home in question. The reports will also include recommendations for the cost-effective improvement of the energy performance of the building which if carried out, would have environmental benefits.

Homelessness

Sarah Teather: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he will list guidance and advice sent by his Department to local authorities in the last year on homelessness.

Yvette Cooper: The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister have issued the following guidance and advice to local authorities:
	Housing Quality Network Report: "Local Authorities' Homeless Strategies Evaluation and Good Practice" Published: November 2004.
	"Effective Co-operation in Tackling Homelessness: Nomination Agreements and Evictions Guidance" Published : November 2004.
	Homelessness and Health Information Sheet Number 3: "Dental services".
	Homelessness and Health Information Sheet Number 4: "Hospital discharge".
	There was statutory guidance, issued under section 182 of the Housing Act 1996, on section 11 of the Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants, etc.) Act 2004 (which amends the local connection provisions of the homelessness legislation).
	In addition we have published the following documents which are available on our website:
	Policy Brief 8: "Homeless Statistics Homeless Statistics March 2004 and Improving the Quality of Hostels and other Forms of Temporary Accommodation"
	Policy Brief 9: "Homelessness Strategies : Moving Forward"
	Policy Brief 10: "Homelessness Statistics September 2004 and Delivering on the Positive Outcomes"
	Policy Brief 11: "Providing More Settled Homes"
	A Strategy for Tackling Homelessness: "Sustainable Communities: Settled Homes; Changing Lives"

Care Homes

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many (a) private, (b) voluntary and (c) local authority (i) care homes and (ii) care home places there have been in each year since 1997.

Liam Byrne: The table shows the number of care homes and places in England by provider for people aged 18 and over as at 31 March 1997 to 2001.
	I understand from the Chair of the Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) that figures for later years were collected by the National Care Standards Commission, and now CSCI, but comparable details are not available.
	
		Number of care homes and places, as at 31 March 1997 to 31 March 2001, England Rounded numbers
		
			   Residential Nursing(9) 
			  Total Local authority Voluntary Private(10) Independent 
		
		
			 Homes  
			 1997 28,850 2,260 3,850 16,830 5,920 
			 1998 28,950 2,230 3,930 16,610 6,180 
			 1999 28,680 2,070 3,860 16,640 6,110 
			 2000 28,320 2,030 3,950 16,460 5,880 
			 2001 27,480 1,870 3,940 15,980 5,680 
			   
			 Places  
			 1997 534,410 65,820 59,170 213,140 196,270 
			 1998 553,490 63,980 60,790 223,130 205,590 
			 1999 546,190 59,030 58,720 226,290 202,150 
			 2000 539,240 55,460 60,720 229,720 193,330 
			 2001 528,000 50,860 61,970 228,340 186,830 
		
	
	(9) Nursing home figures include places in general nursing homes, mental nursing homes, private hospitals and clinics.
	(10) Includes private homes and small homes.
	Notes:
	1. Dual registered homes are included under nursing.
	2. Figures may not sum due to rounding.

Commission for Social Care Inspection

Paul Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what representations her Department has received on the proposal to abolish the Commission for Social Care Inspection.

Liam Byrne: Hon. and right hon. Members have tabled several questions on this topic recently. In addition, departmental Ministers have held exploratory discussions with both the Healthcare Commission and the Commission for Social Care Inspection.

Dentistry

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many NHS dentists are practising in Portsmouth; and how many patients are registered with each.

Rosie Winterton: As at the end of May 2005, there were 75 national health service dentists practising in Portsmouth City Primary Care Trust (PCT) area. Of these, the numbers of patients shown in the table were registered with each practice. Due to data protection rules, the individual dentists cannot be named, but are referred to as dentist 1, dentist 2, etc.
	
		Each dentist in Portsmouth City PCT and the number of patients registered with each as at 31 May 2005
		
			 Dentist number Number of children registered Number of adults registered Total number registered 
		
		
			 1 859 3,356 4,215 
			 2 657 3,102 3,759 
			 3 756 2,270 3,026 
			 4 743 2,256 2,999 
			 5 563 2,416 2,979 
			 6 676 2,238 2,914 
			 7 658 2,229 2,887 
			 8 896 1,887 2,783 
			 9 681 2,095 2,776 
			 10 641 2,019 2,660 
			 11 706 1,938 2,644 
			 12 526 1,827 2,353 
			 13 382 1,902 2,284 
			 14 527 1,628 2,155 
			 15 525 1,520 2,045 
			 16 447 1,572 2,019 
			 17 480 1,532 2,012 
			 18 387 1,574 1,961 
			 19 382 1,504 1,886 
			 20 515 1,343 1,858 
			 21 390 1,349 1,739 
			 22 353 1,309 1,662 
			 23 324 1,230 1,554 
			 24 332 1,220 1,552 
			 25 387 1,066 1,453 
			 26 369 1,044 1,413 
			 27 356 1,027 1,383 
			 28 331 1,052 1,383 
			 29 356 1,020 1,376 
			 30 379 934 1,313 
			 31 269 1,012 1,281 
			 32 315 917 1,232 
			 33 392 785 1,177 
			 34 789 384 1,173 
			 35 388 759 1,147 
			 36 293 849 1,142 
			 37 410 692 1,102 
			 38 288 775 1,063 
			 39 717 182 899 
			 40 661 143 804 
			 41 520 259 779 
			 42 761 12 773 
			 43 620 151 771 
			 44 174 595 769 
			 45 608 125 733 
			 46 235 383 618 
			 47 145 449 594 
			 48 325 241 566 
			 49 116 383 499 
			 50 181 318 499 
			 51 327 158 485 
			 52 352 124 476 
			 53 417 5 422 
			 54 280 108 388 
			 55 234 123 357 
			 56 116 239 355 
			 57 99 196 295 
			 58 205 77 282 
			 59 65 211 276 
			 60 198 18 216 
			 61 121 79 200 
			 62 119 2 121 
			 63 0 87 87 
			 64 0 54 54 
			 65 14 32 46 
			 66 0 0 0 
			 67 0 0 0 
			 68 0 0 0 
			 69 0 0 0 
			 70 0 0 0 
			 71 0 0 0 
			 72 0 0 0 
			 73 0 0 0 
			 74 0 0 0 
			 75 0 0 0 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. The data is snapshot information at the end of each month.
	2. The information includes any dentist who had at least one active registration.
	3. There are various reasons why a dentist may not have any registrations: in particular, specialists such as orthodontists.
	4. It should be understood that personal dental service PDS "registrations" generally have a longer re-registration period than general dental service (GDS) registrations. This means that a patient "registered" under PDS might not have been still registered under GDS, had the dentist remained in GDS.

General Practitioners

Andrew Dismore: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the ratio between the number of general practitioners to population was for each NHS region in the last year for which figures are available.

Liam Byrne: The number of general practitioners (GPs), excluding GP retainers and GP registrars, per 100,000 population in each Government office region as at December 2004 is shown in the table.
	
		General medical practitioners (excluding retainers and registrars)(11) by strategic health authority per 100,000 population, as at 31 December 2004—England Number (headcount)
		
			   All practitioners (excluding retainers and registrars) 1 Population(12)(13) All practitioners (excluding retainers and registrars) 1 per 100,000 population 
		
		
			  England 31,798 49,855,700 64 
			  North East
			 Q10 County Durham and Tees Valley 751 1,146,900 65 
			 Q09 Northumberland, Tyne and Wear 927 1,392,400 67 
			  North West
			 Q15 Cheshire and Merseyside 1,540 2,354,500 65 
			 Q13 Cumbria and Lancashire 1,177 1,919,000 61 
			 Q14 Greater Manchester 1,526 2,531,000 60 
			  
			  Yorkshire and the Humber
			 Q11 North and East Yorkshire and Northern Lincolnshire 1,037 1,640,800 63 
			 Q23 South Yorkshire 827 1,272,600 65 
			 Q12 West Yorkshire 1,397 2,095,900 67 
			  
			  East Midlands
			 Q25 Leicestershire, Northamptonshire and Rutland 894 1,581,500 57 
			 Q24 Trent 1,628 2,670,800 61 
			  West Midlands
			 Q27 Birmingham and The Black Country 1,401 2,273,400 62 
			 Q26 Shropshire and Staffordshire 879 1,496,000 59 
			 Q28 West Midlands South 974 1,550,500 63 
			  
			  East of England
			 Q02 Bedford and Hertfordshire 1,001 1,614,700 62 
			 Q03 Essex 932 1,629,600 57 
			 Q01 Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire 1,475 2,218,600 66 
			  
			  London
			 Q05 North Central London 811 1,220,200 66 
			 Q06 North East London 921 1,530,800 60 
			 Q04 North West London 1,176 1,814,700 65 
			 Q07 South East London 1,007 1,511,800 67 
			 Q08 South West London 846 1,310,400 65 
			  
			  South East
			 Q17 Hampshire and Isle of Wight 1,135 1,797,100 63 
			 Q18 Kent and Medway 912 1,599,900 57 
			 Q19 Surrey and Sussex 1,644 2,570,800 64 
			 Q16 Thames Valley 1,329 2,112,500 63 
			  
			  South West
			 Q20 Avon, Gloucestershire and Wiltshire 1,619 2,191,200 74 
			 Q22 Somerset and Dorset 886 1,206,900 73 
			 Q21 South West Peninsula 1,146 1,601,200 72 
		
	
	(11) General medical practitioners (excluding retainers and registrars) includes contracted GPs , QMS Others and PMS Others.
	(12) Population data as at 2003.
	(13) Population data is rounded to the nearest 100 for presentational purposes.
	Source:
	NHS Health and Social Care Information Centre General and Personal Medical Services Statistics.

General Practitioners

Andrew Dismore: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many general practitioners in practice were aged (a) over 65 and (b) over 70 years in each NHS region in the last year for which figures are available.

Liam Byrne: The number of general practitioners (GPs), excluding GP retainers and GP registrars, aged between 65 and 69 and 70 and over in each Government office region as at December 2004 is shown in the table.
	
		All general medical practitioners, excluding GP retainers and GP registrars, in England, of which aged 65–69 and 70 and over, as at 31 December 2004 Number (headcount)
		
			   All practitioners (excluding GP retainers and GP registrars) of which: 65–69 70 and over 
		
		
			   31,798 641 139 
			  North East
			 Q09 Northumberland, Tyne and Wear 927 12 2 
			 Q10 County Durham and Tees Valley 751 7 4 
			  
			  North West
			 Q13 Cumbria and Lancashire 1,177 21 3 
			 Q14 Greater Manchester 1,526 37 9 
			 Q15 Cheshire and Merseyside 1,540 24 2 
			  
			  Yorkshire and the Humber
			 Q11 North and East Yorkshire and Northern Lincolnshire 1,037 18 3 
			 Q12 West Yorkshire 1,397 34 6 
			 Q23 South Yorkshire 827 18 9 
			  
			  East Midlands
			 Q24 Trent 1,628 24 4 
			 Q25 Leicestershire, Northamptonshire and Rutland 894 7 0 
			  West Midlands
			 Q26 Shropshire and Staffordshire 879 11 2 
			 Q27 Birmingham and the Black Country 1,401 69 10 
			 Q28 West Midlands South 974 8 8 
			  
			  East of England
			 Q01 Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire 1,475 11 1 
			 Q02 Bedford and Hertfordshire 1,001 20 3 
			 Q03 Essex 932 29 8 
			  
			  London
			 Q04 North West London 1,176 51 10 
			 Q05 North Central London 811 43 8 
			 Q06 North East London 921 56 21 
			 Q07 South East London 1,007 43 9 
			 Q08 South West London 846 25 10 
			  
			  South East
			 Q16 Thames Valley 1,329 15 2 
			 Q17 Hampshire and Isle of Wight 1,135 4 0 
			 Q18 Kent and Medway 912 25 2 
			 Q19 Surrey and Sussex 1,644 17 1 
			  
			  South West
			 Q20 Avon, Gloucestershire and Wiltshire 1,619 6 1 
			 Q21 South West Peninsula 1,146 5 0 
			 Q22 Somerset and Dorset 886 1 1 
		
	
	Note:
	General medical practitioners, excluding retainers and registrars, includes contracted GPs, GMS others and PMS others.
	Source:
	NHS Health and Social Care Information Centre General and Personal Medical Services Statistics

General Practitioners

Andrew Selous: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much funding has been made available for self construct general practitioner registrar training in (a) the Eastern Deanery, (b) Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire and (c) England in 2005[en rule]06; how much was made available in 2004[en rule]05; and if she will make a statement.

Liam Byrne: holding answer 21 June 2005
	Funding for trainee general practitioners is part of the overall national health service training budgets allocated to strategic health authorities. The amounts that postgraduate deaneries actually receive is determined locally in the light of local priorities and national work force targets. This information is not held centrally.

Hospital Beds

David Burrowes: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the average daily cost of (a) an intensive care and (b) a high dependency bed is.

Liam Byrne: The national average cost of an occupied bed day in a discrete critical care unit is available in the annual reference costs publication.
	The national schedule of reference costs for 2004 (the latest year available) shows that for activity undertaken within an national health service trust in England, the costs of an occupied bed day in different types of discrete critical care units are shown in the following table.
	
		
			  £ 
			 Unit type National average cost per occupied bed day 
		
		
			 Intensive therapy unit/intensive care unit 1,328 
			 Burns intensive care unit 1,039 
			 Neurosurgical intensive care unit 1,017 
			 Spinal injuries intensive care unit 779 
			 Renal intensive care unit 370 
			 Cardiac intensive care unit 1,025 
			 High dependency unit 584 
			 Paediatric intensive care unit 1,702 
			 Neonatal intensive care unit—level 1 838 
			 Neonatal intensive care unit—level 2 560 
		
	
	A copy of the reference costs publication is available in the Library.

Hospital-acquired Infections

Lynne Featherstone: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what (a) advice is given on and (b) precautions are taken against the spread of MRSA in ambulances; and if she will make a statement.

Jane Kennedy: All national health service organisations, including ambulance trusts, should have systems in place to minimise the risk to patients from health care associated infections as required by Standards for Better Health (July 2004). Infection control policies and any particular precautions for reducing the spread of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) are a matter for individual trusts. Advice on appropriate precautions to reduce the spread of infection has been published by the Department in the Health Service Circular 2000/02 and in "Winning Ways—Working together to reduce Hospital Acquired Infection in England" (December 2003).
	The Ambulance Service Association published "Infection Prevention and Control: Managing Healthcare Associated Infection and Control of Serious Communicable Diseases", in June 2004. The guidance was reviewed recently by the Health Protection Agency, the National Patient Safety Agency and the Department's inspector of microbiology and is deemed to be suitable and sufficient, if used with robust auditing, to control MRSA and other health care associated infections. Additionally, the training and common core syllabus for ambulance personnel covers infection control, including reference to MRSA.

National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence

Greg Hands: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  how much funding has been allocated to the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence in each year since its inception;
	(2)  what budget was allocated to the National Institute for Clinical Excellence in each year since its inception.

Jane Kennedy: The funding allocated to the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) by the Department and the Welsh Assembly Government is show in the table. The figures also include the allocation to NICE's funding for capital charges.
	
		
			  NICE running cost budget (£) 
		
		
			 1999–2000 10,511,000 
			 2000–01 11,158,000 
			 2001–02 12,613,000 
			 2002–03 14,771,000 
			 2003–04 17,494,000 
			 2004–05 19,391,000 
			 2005–06 29,298,000 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. Figures for 1999–2000 to 204–05 relate to the National Institute for Clinical Excellence, the predecessor of NICE.
	2. The figure for 2005–06 reflects the incorporation of functions of the former Health Development Agency and the transfer of funding for the three confidential inquiries to the National Patient Safety Agency.

NHS Acute Hospital Trusts

Frank Dobson: To ask the Secretary of State for Health which NHS acute hospital trusts have financial deficits; and what the deficit is in each case.

Liam Byrne: holding answer 27 June 2005
	The latest year for which audited data on the financial position of national health service organisations are available is 2003–04. The financial position for all NHS trusts with deficits is shown in the table.
	
		
			  £000 
			 NHS trust name 2003–04 deficit position 
		
		
			 Addenbrooke's NHS Trust (921) 
			 Airedale NHS Trust (1,448) 
			 Barnet and Chase Farm Hospitals NHS Trust (4,398) 
			 Barnet, Enfield and Haringey MH NHS Trust (924) 
			 Berkshire Healthcare NHS Trust (851) 
			 Blackpool, Fylde and Wyre Hosps NHS Trust (929) 
			 Brighton and Sussex Univ Hosps NHS Trust (7,912) 
			 Buckinghamshire Hospitals NHS Trust (5,237) 
			 Buckinghamshire Mental Health NHS Trust (1,689) 
			 Burton Hospitals NHS Trust (179) 
			 Chelsea and Westminster Healthcare NHS Trust (1,880) 
			 East Kent Community NHS Trust (225) 
			 East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust (3,934) 
			 East Sussex County NHS Trust (1,025) 
			 East Sussex Hospitals NHS Trust (1,787) 
			 Essex Rivers Healthcare NHS Trust (5,843) 
			 Frimley Park Hospital NHS Trust (524) 
			 Good Hope Hospital NHS Trust (5,014) 
			 Hampshire Ambulance Service NHS Trust (1,727) 
			 Hereford Hospitals NHS Trust (18) 
			 Ipswich Hospital NHS Trust (1,404) 
			 Kettering General Hospital NHS Trust (1,197) 
			 Kings Lynn and Wisbech Hospitals NHS Trust (5,358) 
			 Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust (309) 
			 Local Health Partnerships NHS Trust (489) 
			 Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust (8,968) 
			 Mayday Healthcare NHS Trust (163) 
			 Mid Staffordshire Gen Hospitals NHS Trust (509) 
			 Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust (18,637) 
			 Milton Keynes General Hospital NHS Trust (3,172) 
			 North Cumbria Acute Hospitals NHS Trust (4,133) 
			 North Middlesex University Hosp NHS Trust (989) 
			 North West London Hospitals NHS Trust (3,099) 
			 North West Surrey MH NHS Partnership NHS Trust (1,261) 
			 Northampton General Hospital NHS Trust (4,922) 
			 Nuffield Orthopaedic NHS Trust (309) 
			 Papworth Hospital NHS Trust (252) 
			 Peterborough Hospitals NHS Trust (969) 
			 Plymouth Hospitals NHS Trust (7,753) 
			 Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (495) 
			 Rob Jones and A Hunt Orthopaedic NHS Trust (2,314) 
			 Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS Trust (5,845) 
			 Royal Free Hampstead NHS Trust (961) 
			 Royal Surrey County Hospital NHS Trust (1,549) 
			 Royal United Hospital Bath NHS Trust (1,968) 
			 Royal Wolverhampton Hospital NHS Trust (7,612) 
			 Sandwell and West Birmingham Hosps NHS Trust (1,593) 
			 Shrewsbury and Telford Hospitals NHS Trust (791) 
			 South Tees Hospitals NHS Trust (1,712) 
			 Southampton University Hosps NHS Trust (5,418) 
			 St. George's Healthcare NHS Trust (650) 
			 St. Mary's NHS Trust (503) 
			 Surrey and Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust (4,149) 
			 Sussex Ambulance Service NHS Trust (229) 
			 The Hillingdon Hospital NHS Trust (963) 
			 The Royal West Sussex NHS Trust (3,572) 
			 Trafford Healthcare NHS Trust (744) 
			 Walsall Hospitals NHS Trust (1,057) 
			 West Hertfordshire Hospitals NHS Trust (519) 
			 West London Mental Health NHS Trust (1,369) 
			 West Suffolk Hospitals NHS Trust (2,501) 
			 Weston Area Health NHS Trust (1,514) 
			 Whittington Hospital NHS Trust (3,400) 
			 Worcestershire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust (12,801) 
			 Worthing and Southlands Hospitals NHS Trust (27) 
		
	
	Source:
	2003–04 summarised accounts.

Radiographers

Jim Cousins: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many (a) radiographers of all grades and (b) radiographer trainees were employed in the NHS on average in (i) 1996, (ii) 2000 and (iii) 2004; and what estimate she has made of the numbers who were working on contracts requiring less than the standard 37.5 hours in 2004.

Liam Byrne: The information requested is shown in the table.
	The standard hours for radiographers employed under Whitley Council terms and conditions are 35 hours. "Agenda for Change" replaces these arrangements and, under the new terms and conditions, the standard hours for all staff are 37.5. Implementation of "Agenda for Change" started in December 2004.
	
		National health service hospital and community health services: Radiography staff in England by area of work, level and each specified contract as at 30 September in specified years Headcount
		
			  1996 Of which: part-time 2000 Of which: part-time 2004 Of which: part-time 
		
		
			 Total Radiography staff 12,882 4,091 14,190 5,118 16,921 6,604 
			
			 Radiography (Diagnostic) 11,525 3,804 12,649 4,765 14,932 6,019 
			 Qualified staff 10,265 3,207 11,036 3,953 12,147 4,795 
			 Consultant Therapist/Scientist n/a n/a n/a n/a 4 1 
			 Manager 114 8 155 12 179 18 
			 Therapist 9,647 3,015 10,271 3,723 11,954 4,773 
			 Technician 487 182 595 216 0 0 
			 Tutor 17 2 15 2 10 3 
			
			 Non-qualified staff 1,260 597 1,613 812 2,785 1,224 
			 Assistant Practitioner n/a n/a n/a n/a 75 14 
			 Student/Trainee 47 18 19 2 80 8 
			 Helper/Assistant 1,213 579 1,594 810 2,630 1,202 
			
			 Radiography (Therapeutic) 1,357 287 1,541 353 1,989 585 
			 Qualified staff 1,308 262 1,453 323 1,753 510 
			 Consultant Therapist/Scientist n/a n/a n/a n/a 1 0 
			 Manager 13 1 19 0 30 3 
			 Therapist 1,295 261 1,434 323 1,722 507 
			
			 Non-qualified staff 49 25 88 30 236 75 
			 Assistant Practitioner n/a n/a n/a n/a 13 2 
			 Student/Trainee 0 0 1 0 4 2 
			 Helper/Assistant 49 25 87 30 219 71 
		
	
	n/a = Not applicable.
	Source:
	Health and Social Care Information Centre Non-Medical Workforce Census.

Residential Care

Paul Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many adults were placed in residential care out of area in each of the last five years; and what proportion of state funded adult placements this represented in each year.

Liam Byrne: The number and percentage of residential and nursing care residents funded by councils with social service responsibilities (CSSRs) placed outside their CSSR in England, 2000 to 2004, is shown in the table.
	
		Number and percentage of residential and nursing care residents funded by CSSRs placed outside their CSSR in England, 2000–04—England, as at 31 March Rounded numbers
		
			  Total Residential care(14) Nursing care(15) 
			  Number Percentage(16) Number Percentage(17) Number Percentage(18) 
		
		
			 2000 43,800 17 29,700 16 14,100 19 
			 2001 44,000 17 29,800 16 14,100 20 
			 2002 46,700 18 31,800 17 14,900 20 
			 2003 47,700 17 31,800 15 15,900 20 
			 2004 49,100 18 33,700 17 15,500 20 
		
	
	(14) Includes local authority staffed, voluntary and private care homes and small or unstaffed homes.
	(15) General and mental nursing homes only.
	(16) As a percentage of all CSSR supported residents.
	(17) As a percentage of all CSSR supported residents in residential care.
	(18) As a percentage of all CSSR supported residents in nursing care.
	Note:
	Figures may not add up due to rounding.
	Source:
	SRI form.

Adult Literacy

Sarah Teather: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what assessment she has made of the level of adult literacy in each London borough.

Bill Rammell: The "Skills for Life Survey: A national needs and impact survey of literacy, numeracy and ICT skills" (DfES, October 2003) provides the latest estimates of literacy levels across England. The survey assessed the literacy, numeracy and ICT skills of around 8,000 adults aged 16 and above in England.
	The findings for the London boroughs are shown in the table. The proportion of adults with literacy skills below level 1 varies from 38 per cent. in Newham to 4 per cent. in the City of London. The assessment levels correspond to the new literacy and numeracy core curriculum and National Standards: Level 1 is broadly equivalent to a lower grade GCSE (grade D-G) and Level 2 to a higher grade GCSE (grade A*-C).
	A copy of the survey report is available in the House of Commons Library and on the DfES website: www.dfes.gov.uk
	
		Adult Literacy levels across London drawn from the Skills for Life Survey(19)
		
			  Total entry level Level 1 skills Level 2 skills 
			 Literacy Number Proportion (%) Number Proportion (%) Number Proportion (%) 
		
		
			 Barking and Dagenham 19,340 19 47,690 47 33,800 34 
			 Barnet 20,670 10 83,250 41 99,720 49 
			 Bexley 8,695 6 71,530 52 57,550 42 
			 Brent 34,400 19 62,360 35 82,950 46 
			 Bromley 20,500 11 60,000 32 105,500 57 
			 Camden 9,210 7 47,490 35 78,960 58 
			 City of London 215 4 1,560 30 3,495 66 
			 Croydon 27,500 13 96,410 45 90,290 42 
			 Ealing 26,980 13 86,730 42 91,420 45 
			 Enfield 26,500 15 75,510 43 74,310 42 
			 Greenwich 22,380 16 61,070 44 54,950 40 
			 Hackney 24,520 18 46,430 34 64,410 48 
			 Hammersmith and Fulham 7,515 6 43,100 36 68,440 57 
			 Haringey 26,620 18 49,230 33 73,470 49 
			 Harrow 17,440 13 53,390 40 63,680 47 
			 Havering 12,730 9 61,330 44 65,670 47 
			 Hillingdon 22,870 15 55,600 36 76,080 49 
			 Hounslow 21,400 15 58,430 41 63,380 44 
			 Islington 9,395 8 48,720 40 64,290 53 
			 Kensington and Chelsea 5,620 5 34,920 31 71,580 64 
			 Kingston upon Thames 8,940 9 31,320 32 57,090 59 
			 Lambeth 22,200 12 70,250 37 95,940 51 
			 Lewisham 25,440 15 60,160 36 81,900 49 
			 Merton 11,870 9 51,700 41 63,190 50 
			 Newham 59,900 38 44,170 28 53,330 34 
			 Redbridge 23,750 16 63,720 42 65,550 43 
			 Richmond upon Thames 8,990 8 31,210 27 74,420 65 
			 Southwark 30,740 19 57,010 35 77,500 47 
			 Sutton 14,100 12 39,350 34 61,880 54 
			 Tower Hamlets 24,240 18 48,300 37 58,680 45 
			 Waltham Forest 22,690 16 66,510 46 55,920 39 
			 Wandsworth 10,860 6 58,730 31 118,000 63 
			 Westminster 12,290 10 41,060 32 75,440 59 
		
	
	(19) Source: DfES, 2003

Class Sizes

Francis Maude: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what the average class size in (a) primary and junior schools and (b) secondary schools in (i) West Sussex, (ii) Kent, (iii) Durham, (iv) the East Riding of Yorkshire and (v) each English county was in each of the last eight years.

Jacqui Smith: The information requested is shown in the table.
	
		Maintained primary and secondary schools(20): average class size(21)Position as at January each year: 1998 to 2005 (provisional)—by each English county local education authority and East Riding of Yorkshire local education authority
		
			  Classes taught by one teacher 
			  1998 1999 2000 2001 
			  Primary(22) Secondary Primary(22) Secondary Primary(22) Secondary Primary(22) Secondary 
		
		
			 West Sussex 27.0 21.6 27.2 21.4 27.3 21.8 26.9 22.2 
			 Kent(23) 28.2 20.4 — — — — — — 
			 Kent(24) — — 28.1 20.8 27.7 21.0 27.4 21.3 
			 Durham 28.1 22.3 27.2 22.6 26.6 22.0 26.1 22.2 
			 East Riding of Yorkshire 28.7 21.6 28.3 22.1 27.4 22.0 27.3 21.8 
			 Bedfordshire 27.0 22.4 26.7 22.3 26.1 22.6 25.2 22.5 
			 Buckinghamshire 28.1 21.0 27.8 21.6 26.6 22.2 26.4 21.6 
			 Cambridgeshire(23) 28.5 22.0 — — — — — — 
			 Cambridgeshire(24) — — 28.7 22.8 28.0 23.3 27.5 23.5 
			 Cheshire(23) 27.2 21.4 — — — — — — 
			 Cheshire(24) — — 27.4 21.3 26.8 21.0 26.3 21.0 
			 Cornwall 27.6 22.4 27.9 22.3 27.3 22.6 26.5 22.6 
			 Cumbria 26.2 21.1 25.8 21.0 25.2 21.3 25.0 21.1 
			 Derbyshire 29.5 22.2 28.2 22.4 28.3 22.5 27.3 22.2 
			 Devon(23) 28.0 21.7 — — — — — — 
			 Devon(24) — — 26.7 22.0 26.5 22.4 26.5 22.5 
			 Dorset 27.5 22.5 27.0 22.0 26.4 22.6 26.1 22.8 
			 East Sussex 28.3 21.4 28.7 22.1 28.2 22.1 28.2 22.3 
			 Essex(23) 27.6 21.7 — — — — — — 
			 Essex(24) — — 27.7 21.6 27.4 22.0 26.9 21.9 
			 Gloucestershire 27.5 21.7 27.5 21.2 27.3 21.4 26.3 21.4 
			 Hampshire 28.3 22.4 28.2 22.7 28.0 22.9 27.5 22.9 
			 Hertfordshire 27.2 20.2 27.1 20.6 27.1 20.8 26.9 21.0 
			 Lancashire(23) 28.9 22.5 — — — — — — 
			 Lancashire(24) — — 28.2 22.4 27.7 22.7 27.3 22.6 
			 Leicestershire 26.9 22.3 26.7 22.4 26.7 22.8 26.3 23.2 
			 Lincolnshire 27.0 20.3 27.3 20.6 27.3 21.2 26.6 21.4 
			 Norfolk 26.4 20.2 25.9 20.4 25.9 21.0 25.4 21.2 
			 North Yorkshire 26.8 21.0 26.6 21.2 25.8 21.1 25.3 21.1 
			 Northamptonshire 27.3 21.4 27.3 21.5 26.8 21.6 25.9 21.5 
			 Northumberland 27.3 23.0 26.4 23.0 25.4 22.6 24.9 22.4 
			 Nottinghamshire(23) 28.8 21.7 — — — — — — 
			 Nottinghamshire(24) — — 28.4 21.8 27.8 22.0 27.2 22.0 
			 Oxfordshire 27.5 22.0 27.1 22.1 26.8 22.6 25.9 22.4 
			 Shropshire(23) 27.3 22.0 — — — — — — 
			 Shropshire(24) — — 26.9 21.6 26.0 21.6 25.3 22.2 
			 Somerset 27.8 23.9 27.9 23.9 27.6 23.6 26.9 23.9 
			 Staffordshire 27.4 22.3 26.7 22.3 26.6 22.4 25.9 21.9 
			 Suffolk 25.0 20.8 24.9 20.8 24.9 21.1 24.7 21.4 
			 Surrey 26.7 21.6 26.9 22.2 27.0 22.3 26.8 22.5 
			 Warwickshire 28.5 21.9 27.6 21.7 27.5 21.7 26.7 22.0 
			 Wiltshire 27.2 21.3 27.3 22.0 26.7 21.9 26.3 21.7 
			 Hereford and Worcester(23) 26.7 22.1 — — — — — — 
			 Worcestershire(24) — — 27.0 22.3 26.8 22.2 26.2 22.0 
		
	
	
		
			  2002 2003 2004 2005 (provisional) 
			  Primary(22) Secondary Primary(22) Secondary Primary(22) Secondary Primary(22) Secondary 
		
		
			 West Sussex 26.1 22.0 26.1 22.1 26.4 22.0 26.5 22.1 
			 Kent(23) — — — — — — — — 
			 Kent(24) 27.2 21.0 27.0 21.1 26.9 21.1 26.6 21.0 
			 Durham 25.3 21.9 25.1 21.6 25.1 21.8 25.0 21.7 
			 East Riding of Yorkshire 26.6 22.2 26.4 22.2 26.3 21.6 26.0 21.9 
			 Bedfordshire 24.6 22.2 24.6 22.0 24.4 22.0 24.6 22.2 
			 Buckinghamshire 25.5 22.1 25.7 21.8 25.6 21.4 25.5 21.5 
			 Cambridgeshire(23) — — — — — — — — 
			 Cambridgeshire(24) 27.1 23.0 27.1 22.8 27.1 23.1 26.9 23.1 
			 Cheshire(23) — — — — — — — — 
			 Cheshire(24) 25.6 21.2 25.8 21.1 25.8 21.3 25.7 21.2 
			 Cornwall 26.3 22.4 26.0 22.4 26.2 22.3 26.1 22.4 
			 Cumbria 24.5 20.7 24.5 20.8 24.7 20.7 24.6 21.2 
			 Derbyshire 27.0 22.3 26.9 21.9 27.0 22.1 26.7 22.0 
			 Devon(23) — — — — — — — — 
			 Devon(24) 25.4 22.2 25.7 22.4 25.8 22.2 25.8 21.8 
			 Dorset 25.4 22.7 25.5 22.0 25.2 22.0 25.4 22.0 
			 East Sussex 27.6 21.9 27.5 21.8 27.5 21.9 27.6 21.8 
			 Essex(23) — — — — — — — — 
			 Essex(24) 26.5 21.9 26.6 21.8 26.7 21.9 26.6 22.0 
			 Gloucestershire 25.4 21.9 25.3 21.9 25.7 21.4 26.0 20.7 
			 Hampshire 27.1 22.9 27.2 22.8 27.2 22.7 27.2 22.8 
			 Hertfordshire 26.9 20.9 26.6 20.9 26.6 20.8 26.6 20.8 
			 Lancashire(23) — — — — — — — — 
			 Lancashire(24) 26.7 22.4 26.5 22.5 26.4 22.6 26.3 22.2 
			 Leicestershire 25.9 22.7 26.4 22.5 26.4 22.6 26.2 22.4 
			 Lincolnshire 26.0 21.3 26.1 21.4 26.2 21.5 26.3 21.3 
			 Norfolk 25.1 20.7 25.1 21.0 25.5 20.9 25.8 21.5 
			 North Yorkshire 24.6 20.6 24.5 20.6 24.4 20.8 24.5 20.5 
			 Northamptonshire 25.5 21.8 25.7 21.9 25.9 21.4 25.9 21.4 
			 Northumberland 24.5 22.6 24.7 22.4 25.0 22.1 24.5 22.0 
			 Nottinghamshire(23) — — — — — — — — 
			 Nottinghamshire(24) 26.8 21.5 26.9 21.5 26.7 21.5 26.7 21.2 
			 Oxfordshire 25.1 22.1 24.9 22.0 25.2 21.5 25.5 21.3 
			 Shropshire(23) — — — — — — — — 
			 Shropshire(24) 25.6 22.3 25.6 22.0 25.9 22.2 26.6 21.8 
			 Somerset 26.0 23.5 26.2 23.5 26,1 23.6 25.9 23.3 
			 Staffordshire 25.2 22.0 25.8 21.8 25.9 21.7 26.0 21.5 
			 Suffolk 24.6 21.3 24.5 21.4 24.5 21.8 24.6 21.8 
			 Surrey 26.4 22.0 26.3 22.1 26.3 22.3 26.7 22.5 
			 Warwickshire 26.4 22.0 26.3 21.9 26.1 21.7 26.0 21.5 
			 Wiltshire 26.1 21.9 25.8 22.2 25.9 21.8 25.8 21.6 
			 Hereford and Worcester(23) — — — — — — — — 
			 Worcestershire(24) 25.8 22.4 25.6 22.4 25.8 22.2 25.7 21.8 
		
	
	(20) Includes middle schools as deemed.
	(21) Classes as taught during a single selected period in each school on the day of the census in January.
	(22) Includes junior schools.
	(23) Before Local Government Reorganisation.
	(24) After Local Government Reorganisation.
	Source:
	Annual Schools' Census

Computer Crime

Paul Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many cases of computer (a) hacking, (b) fraud and (c) theft her Department recorded in each year since 2001–02; and for each year, on how many occasions computer systems have been illegally accessed by computer hackers (i) within and (ii) outside her Department.

Bill Rammell: The number of cases of computer hacking detected in the Department for Education and Skills was nil in 2001–02, 2002–03 and 2003–04. There was one case of computer hacking in 2004–05 which was perpetrated by an outsider. The number of cases of fraud detected was three in 2001–02 and two in 2002–03. All were perpetrated by persons outside the Department. There was no fraud, internal or external, in 2003–04 or 2004–05. The number of cases of computer theft detected was nine in 2001–02, six in 2002–03 all perpetrated by insiders, 23 in 2003–04 of which 22 were perpetrated by insiders and one by persons outside the Department and 14 in 2004–05—all were perpetrated by insiders.

Foster Care

John Hemming: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what the total cost was of the most expensive external foster care placement in each Government Office region in (a) 2002, (b) 2003 and (c) 2004.

Maria Eagle: Information about the cost of individual placements is not collected centrally.

Foster Care

John Hemming: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what the average cost per child of external foster care for local authorities was in each Government office region in (a) 2002, (b) 2003 and (c) 2004.

Maria Eagle: The average gross weekly expenditure to local authorities, per looked after child, of foster care provided by others from 2001–02 to 2003–04 is set out in the table.
	
		
			£000 
			  Average gross weekly expenditure per looked after child in foster care provided by others Average gross weekly expenditure per looked after child in foster care provided by others (including respite and short term placements and placed for adoption) 
			 Year ending March 2002 March 2003 March 2004 
		
		
			 North East 1,031 696 808 
			 North West 774 579 652 
			 South East 905 973 933 
			 East Midlands 1,536 757 832 
			 East 748 693 686 
			 South West 695 848 744 
			 West Midlands 695 727 790 
			 Yorkshire and  the Humber 783 592 797 
			 London 626 817 791

Foster Care

John Hemming: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what the total expenditure on external foster care by local authorities was in each Government office region in (a) 2002, (b) 2003 and (c) 2004.

Maria Eagle: The gross total cost to local authorities for children looked after in foster care placements provided by others from 2001–02 to 2003–04 is shown in the following table.
	
		Gross total cost for children looked after in foster care provided by others £000
		
			  Year ending 31 March: 
			  2002 2003 2004 
		
		
			 North East 5,806 9,216 10,815 
			 North West 13,713 18,901 25,802 
			 South East 17,424 25,874 32,380 
			 East Midlands 7,878 8,068 11,545 
			 East 13,678 21,759 27,585 
			 South West 10,056 12,872 17,431 
			 West Midlands 30,614 31,198 34,220 
			 Yorkshire and the Humber 7,398 10,539 20,022 
			 London 71,292 94,749 104,734

Press Officers

Paul Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many press officers the Department and its predecessors employed in each year since 1997; and what the cost was in each year.

Bill Rammell: The information requested is set out in the table.
	
		
			  Staff numbers Spend (£000) 
		
		
			 1996–97 19 702 
			 1997–98 20.5 729 
			 1998–99 29.5 969 
			 1999–2000 28 997 
			 2000–01 28 1,307 
			 2001–02 28 1,097 
			 2002–03 23.4 1,314 
			 2003 -04 18.5 1,352 
			 2004–05 18 1,200

School Building

Paul Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what assessment has been made of the need for school building maintenance, updated for current price levels for (a) primary, (b) secondary and (c) other schools in each London borough, in the last five years.

Jacqui Smith: Data on school buildings maintenance have been supplied to the Department twice; firstly in 2000–01 and secondly in 2003. The following table shows, for the two data collections, primary, secondary and other schools figures for each London local education authority. Costs have been updated to current costs. In addition to backlog repair work, the figures cover work needed over a five year period from the dates of the assessments, including cyclical and scheduled maintenance.
	Central Government capital support for investment in schools has increased from under £700 million in 1996–97 to £5.5 billion this year and will rise further to £6.3 billion by 2007–08. Progress is being made year-by-year in improving the quality of the school building stock.
	
		Schools maintenance requirements £
		
			  Primary Secondary Other 
			  2001 2003 2001 2003 2001 2003 
		
		
			 Barking and Dagenham 2,243,698 39,410,803 4,201,813 22,906,721 27,188 123,934 
			 Barnet 39,024,662 40,107,660 24,673,568 34,029,880 1,915,432 2,534,913 
			 Bexley 20,360,801 21,722,163 19,803,174 22,846,338 1,337,509 1,579,120 
			 Brent 29,010,597 25,072,826 20,033,334 17,006,117 2,196,700 1,865,460 
			 Bromley 19,414,064 24,100,807 20,216,776 26,389,627 920,896 1,585,557 
			 Camden 8,573,851 12,159,257 11,641,138 11,119,195 1,445,671 1,330,147 
			 Croydon 13,422,452 14,553,936 12,783,519 13,776,575 1,370,416 1,422,410 
			 Ealing 34,045,012 31,082,778 17,170,999 15,440,938 2,375,832 2,243,389 
			 Enfieid 37,183,816 28,203,143 31,075,780 22,440,115 3,565,292 2,372,245 
			 Greenwich 35,522,158 39,219,290 11,743,286 26,946,521 6,243,138 4,184,282 
			 Hackney 28,900,873 36,353,462 16,131,501 21,767,674 3,952,027 3,074,077 
			 Hammersmith and Fulham 12,119,573 9,928,217 12,038,322 11,371,871 3,032,569 3,157,738 
			 Haringey — 35,945,789 — 13,790,757 — 1,673,651 
			 Harrow 11,433,656 13,495,330 8,461,492 11,153,747 6,745,305 7,135,427 
			 Havering 38,425,867 33,035,051 29,858,490 28,783,241 1,410,024 1,522,827 
			 Hillingdon 20,214,363 21,587,648 14,246,302 16,975,522 1,624,914 1,809,548 
			 Hounslow 23,175,540 29,106,708 17,527,247 27,857,095 1,574,181 3,246,966 
			 Islington 34,505,108 23,651,347 18,588,643 12,497,917 3,827,587 2,475,645 
			 Kensington and Chelsea 7,801,892 6,454,041 1,968,212 2,212,459 1,625,229 1,460,770 
			 Kingston upon Thames 12,486,084 17,837,505 17,660,145 23,544,250 1,321,771 1,938,597 
			 Lambeth — 54,827,241 — 44,242,445 — 8,344,663 
			 Lewisham 39,378,088 35,584,122 23,882,208 23,306,117 4,061,893 3,882,120 
			 Merton 10,474,790 12,148,736 7,864,319 8,892,701 9,226,542 1,967,176 
			 Newham 40,501,813 28,281,733 23,151,778 19,748,374 2,547,393 911,797 
			 Redbridge 25,335,410 22,578,687 22,502,056 21,320,757 1,937,394 1,120,458 
			 Richmond upon Thames 13,120,661 13,795,165 — 10,220,238 762,559 764,066 
			 Southwark 22,846,082 29,505,233 10,992,214 17,986,923 4,623,772 4,434,201 
			 Sutton 9,249,811 10,388,821 13,107,369 8,964,390 1,533,305 928,842 
			 Tower Hamlets 21,170,592 13,587,966 19,349,058 12,377,368 4,010,666 1,356,707 
			 Waltham Forest 20,079,861 14,788,170 15,492,380 10,053,638 3,025,488 1,900,798 
			 Wandsworth 40,590,068 40,590,068 29,674,514 29,674,514 6,990,906 6,990,906 
			 Westminster 16,589,720 14,082,979 21,714,889 13,172,533 1,082,643 1,957,073 
		
	
	'—' indicates no data supplied, or data appraised as unreliable.

School Funding

Francis Maude: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what the funding per pupil in (a) primary and junior schools and (b) secondary schools in (i) West Sussex, (ii) Kent, (iii) Durham, (iv) the East Riding of Yorkshire and (v) each English county was in each of the last eight years.

Jacqui Smith: The figures requested are expressed in real terms and set out in the following tables.
	
		Pupils aged three to 10 £
		
			  LEA 1998–99 1999–2000 2000–01 2001–02 2002–03 2003–04 2004–05 2005–06 
		
		
			 938 West Sussex 2,430 2,550 2,750 2,910 2,970 3,110 3,220 3,360 
			 886 Kent 2,480 2,620 2,840 3,000 3,050 3,180 3,330 3,450 
			 840 Durham 2,310 2,470 2,740 2,960 2,990 3,190 3,300 3,540 
			 811 East Riding of Yorkshire 2,260 2,420 2,650 2,810 2,820 3,010 3,110 3,290 
			 815 North Yorkshire 2,310 2,480 2,710 2,850 2,890 3,120 3,220 3,390 
			 820 Bedfordshire 2,390 2,540 2,780 2,940 2,980 3,120 3,230 3,410 
			 825 Buckinghamshire 2,450 2,600 2,810 2,970 3,020 3,150 3,290 3,450 
			 830 Derbyshire 2,250 2,410 2,630 2,750 2,820 3,000 3,120 3,290 
			 835 Dorset 2,350 2,480 2,690 2,810 2,840 2,960 3,080 3,230 
			 845 East Sussex 2,500 2,660 2,900 3,050 3,090 3,220 3,360 3,510 
			 850 Hampshire 2,360 2,490 2,700 2,860 2,910 3,060 3,170 3,300 
			 855 Leicestershire 2,260 2,400 2,600 2,730 2,750 2,860 2,970 3,120 
			 860 Staffordshire 2,200 2,340 2,540 2,680 2,680 2,910 3,010 3,180 
			 865 Wiltshire 2,360 2,500 2,700 2,820 2,870 3,100 3,190 3,360 
			 873 Cambridgeshire 2,310 2,480 2,680 2,800 2,840 3,090 3,220 3,380 
			 875 Cheshire 2,250 2,400 2,610 2,750 2,790 2,970 3,070 3,260 
			 878 Devon 2,440 2,540 2,740 2,870 2,920 3,100 3,210 3,360 
			 881 Essex 2,480 2,610 2,830 2,990 3,040 3,200 3,320 3,460 
			 885 Worcestershire 2,300 2,400 2,610 2,740 2,770 2,900 3,010 3,180 
			 888 Lancashire 2,350 2,520 2,750 2,900 2,950 3,100 3,230 3,420 
			 891 Nottinghamshire 2,270 2,410 2,650 2,780 2,830 2,990 3,080 3,260 
			 893 Shropshire 2,350 2,500 2,710 2,870 2,900 3,110 3,230 3,410 
			 908 Cornwall 2,400 2,560 2,780 2,940 2,990 3,150 3,250 3,420 
			 909 Cumbria 2,280 2,450 2,700 2,870 2,910 3,170 3,280 3,460 
			 916 Gloucestershire 2,330 2,490 2,700 2,840 2,880 3,010 3,100 3,280 
			 919 Hertfordshire 2,450 2,570 2,790 2,930 2,970 3,140 3,260 3,380 
			 925 Lincolnshire 2,350 2,490 2,700 2,860 2,920 3,120 3,220 3,410 
			 926 Norfolk 2,390 2,550 2,770 2,930 2,980 3,160 3,290 3,460 
			 928 Northamptonshire 2,290 2,450 2,650 2,780 2,840 3,060 3,160 3,340 
			 929 Northumberland 2,280 2,430 2,650 2,810 2,850 3,090 3,220 3,420 
			 931 Oxfordshire 2,470 2,610 2,830 2,980 3,030 3,180 3,310 3,450 
			 933 Somerset 2,340 2,500 2,720 2,850 2,900 3,060 3,170 3,310 
			 935 Suffolk 2,340 2,470 2,670 2,790 2,820 2,980 3,110 3,260 
			 936 Surrey 2,460 2,580 2,780 2,930 2,980 3,130 3,230 3,420 
			 937 Warwickshire 2,270 2,430 2,620 2,760 2,820 3,030 3,140 3,300 
		
	
	
		Pupils aged 11 to 15 £
		
			  LEA 1998–99 1999–2000 2000–01 2001–02 2002–03 2003–04 2004–05 2005–06 
		
		
			 938 West Sussex 3,220 3,290 3,520 3,710 3,790 3,820 4,020 4,110 
			 886 Kent 3,300 3,380 3,660 3,850 3,940 3,980 4,230 4,300 
			 840 Durham 3,240 3,360 3,650 3,860 3,910 3,970 4,140 4,340 
			 811 East Riding of Yorkshire 3,070 3,170 3,440 3,580 3,640 3,610 3,820 3,950 
			 815 North Yorkshire 3,120 3,220 3,480 3,620 3,690 3,680 3,860 3,980 
			 820 Bedfordshire 3,220 3,320 3,630 3,860 3,950 3,910 4,110 4,240 
			 825 Buckinghamshire 3,250 3,340 3,600 3,800 3,900 3,940 4,130 4,240 
			 830 Derbyshire 3,060 3,150 3,400 3,550 3,630 3,680 3,860 4,010 
			 835 Dorset 3,070 3,170 3,430 3,570 3,640 3,660 3,860 3,970 
			 845 East Sussex 3,320 3,410 3,700 3,880 4,000 4,010 4,240 4,340 
			 850 Hampshire 3,150 3,220 3,470 3,670 3,760 3,780 3,980 4,070 
			 855 Leicestershire 3,010 3,100 3,340 3,470 3,520 3,520 3,710 3,800 
			 860 Staffordshire 3,020 3,110 3,360 3,500 3,560 3,590 3,780 3,910 
			 865 Wiltshire 3,110 3,230 3,470 3,600 3,660 3,730 3,890 4,020 
			 873 Cambridgeshire 3,110 3,220 3,450 3,570 3,660 3,750 3,970 4,090 
			 875 Cheshire 3,040 3,130 3,370 3,500 3,560 3,640 3,840 3,990 
			 878 Devon 3,210 3,300 3,520 3,640 3,710 3,710 3,910 4,040 
			 881 Essex 3,300 3,390 3,650 3,840 3,920 3,970 4,190 4,270 
			 885 Worcestershire 3,040 3,140 3,400 3,570 3,630 3,650 3,840 3,970 
			 888 Lancashire 3,180 3,290 3,560 3,720 3,800 3,810 4,030 4,170 
			 891 Nottinghamshire 3,080 3,180 3,450 3,560 3,630 3,670 3,850 3,970 
			 893 Shropshire 3,110 3,200 3,450 3,610 3,710 3,810 3,990 4,090 
			 908 Cornwall 3,240 3,340 3,590 3,730 3,810 3,770 3,960 4,090 
			 909 Cumbria 3,160 3,270 3,550 3,730 3,810 3,830 4,020 4,170 
			 916 Gloucestershire 3,080 3,210 3,470 3,590 3,650 3,710 3,880 4,010 
			 919 Hertfordshire 3,330 3,420 3,680 3,860 3,940 3,910 4,120 4,170 
			 925 Lincolnshire 3,180 3,300 3,550 3,710 3,790 3,840 4,040 4,160 
			 926 Norfolk 3,190 3,300 3,560 3,730 3,820 3,820 4,040 4,150 
			 928 Northamptonshire 3,140 3,260 3,490 3,630 3,700 3,790 3,980 4,110 
			 929 Northumberland 3,170 3,270 3,590 3,820 3,890 3,870 4,070 4,250 
			 931 Oxfordshire 3,230 3,330 3,610 3,790 3,880 3,930 4,130 4,220 
			 933 Somerset 3,140 3,240 3,500 3,630 3,720 3,800 4,000 4,090 
			 935 Suffolk 3,110 3,200 3,460 3,640 3,730 3,700 3,910 4,010 
			 936 Surrey 3,300 3,380 3,610 3,800 3,880 3,900 4,080 4,230 
			 937 Warwickshire 3,060 3,180 3,400 3,530 3,620 3,730 3,930 4,040 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. Price Base: Real terms at 2003–04 prices, based on GDP deflators as at 23 March 2005.
	2. Figures reflect relevant sub-blocks of education SSA/EFS settlements and exclude the pensions transfer to EPS.
	3. Total funding also includes all revenue grants in DfES Departmental Expenditure Limits relevant to pupils aged three to 10 and 11 to 15 and exclude Education Maintenance Allowances and grants not allocated at LEA level. For those LEAs in receipt of advance of grant under the transitional support arrangements for 2004–05, advance grant funding is included in the year of payment (2004–05). There will be a consequential reduction in DfES grant for these LEAs in future years (either 2006–07 and 2007–08 or 2006–7 to 2008–9, depending on the terms on which the advance was given to the LEA).
	4. The pupil numbers used to convert £ million figures to £ per pupil are those underlying the SSA/EFS settlement calculations plus PLASC three-year-old maintained pupils and estimated three to four-year-olds funded through state support in maintained and other educational institutions where these are not included in the SSA pupil numbers.
	5. Rounding: Figures are rounded to the nearest 10.
	6. Status: 2005–06 figures are provisional as some grants have not yet been finalised/audited.

Schools (Sutton)

Paul Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many children are attending schools in the London borough of Sutton in the 2004–05 academic year, broken down by (a) local authority and (b) (i) primary, (ii) secondary and (iii) special school.

Jacqui Smith: The requested information is given in the table.
	
		Maintained primary, secondary and all special schools(27): number (headcount) of pupils(28)—as at January 2005 (provisional)—Sutton local education authority area, by local authority area Headcount of pupils
		
			Special 
			  Primary Secondary Maintained Non-maintained Total Total 
		
		
			 Sutton local authority 14,790 14,740 270 80 350 29,880 
			 Epsom and Ewell local authority 260 1,220 n/a n/a n/a 1,480 
			
			 Sutton local education authority 15,050 15,960 270 80 350 31,360 
		
	
	n/a = not applicable.
	(27) Includes middle schools as deemed.
	(28) Excludes dually registered pupils.
	Note:
	Pupil numbers nave been rounded to the neatest 10. There may be discrepancies between the sum of constituent items and totals as shown.
	Source:
	Annual Schools Census

Special Educational Needs

Lindsay Hoyle: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what the average time taken to statement a pupil in Lancashire education authority was in the last period for which figures are available.

Maria Eagle: The Department for Education and Skills does not hold data on the average time taken to issue a statement for pupils with special educational needs in local education authorities. Relevant data is however available from the Audit Commission. The LEA Best Value indicator BV 43b shows that 67.1 per cent. of draft statements of SEN in Lancashire were prepared within 18 weeks during 2003–04. If cases covered by the statutory exceptions to the time limits—as set out in the Education (Special Educational Needs) (England) (Consolidation) Regulations 2001, Section 12(7)—are excluded, 89.7 per cent. were prepared within the 18 week period (Indicator BV 43a).
	The estimate presented here is in resource terms. This is the resource cost to the Department of loans—specifically of providing an interest subsidy and of writing-off some loans. It is on a different basis to (Commons Written) PQ 3057, which concerned the cost to the Department of issuing loans for fees to all EU students, not just those who move outside the UK after graduation, and uses an updated discount rate to calculate resource costs 1 .
	1 Resource cost estimates updated using latest 2.2 per cent. discount rate.
	Note
	Figure rounded to the nearest £5 million.

Student Debt

Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills 
	(1)  what the total amount was of debt repaid by (a) UK and (b) EU students who graduated from English universities in each year since 1994; and what proportion of debt remains outstanding for each year;
	(2)  what the average proportion of student loan debt repaid by United Kingdom borrowers entering repayment status was in each financial year since 1999.

Bill Rammell: Borrowers with income-contingent loans repay 9 per cent. of income over £15,000. They may voluntarily pay more. Borrowers enter repayment status in the April after they have graduated, or otherwise left their course.
	The table shows the amount repaid on UK publicly-owned student loans by financial year.
	
		
			  £ million 
			 Financial year Amount repaid 
		
		
			 1994–95 27.4 
			 1995–96 50.5 
			 1996–97 86.1 
			 1997–98 133.6 
			 1998–99 134.5 
			 1999–2000 131.2 
			 2000–01 178.4 
			 2001–02 266.8 
			 2002–03 332.6 
			 2003–04 413.0 
		
	
	Source:
	Student Loans Company
	Figures include repayments on both income-contingent and mortgage-style loans. Note that the figures are repayments posted during the financial year from all borrowers, regardless of when they entered repayment status or are due to enter repayment status. It would be misleading to show these repayments as a proportion of the total amount outstanding at the end of the year, as a significant part of the outstanding amount is loans that are not yet in repayment status. EU students are not eligible for maintenance loans in the UK. Figures are not available separately for UK students in English universities.
	In general, repayments of income-contingent loans are collected through the tax system. Repayments are notified to the Student Loans Company (SLC) after the end of the tax year, after which SLC reconcile the repayments notified with their records. Therefore there will be some repayments that have been made but are not yet reflected in the figures.
	The following table shows repayments of income-contingent loans, and amounts outstanding and repaid as a percentage of the total, for cohorts of borrowers. The table shows the position reported in June 2005; figures will change as further repayments are recorded for each cohort.
	
		
			 Year borrower entered repayment status (cohort) Repayments (£ million) Percentage of amount outstanding Percentage of amount repaid 
		
		
			 2000 24.3 86 14 
			 2001 39.8 90 10 
			 2002 121.6 92 8 
			 2003 115.3 95 5 
			 2004 83.5 97 3 
		
	
	Source:
	Student Loans Company
	The first cohort of income contingent borrowers entered repayment status in April 2000. The earnings of graduates are likely to rise in the years after leaving higher education, therefore the repayments of income-contingent loans will be lower in the early years. This is reflected in the table. Information in this format is not held centrally for mortgage-style borrowers.

Student Loans

James Clappison: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what legal powers are available to the Student Loans Company to obtain repayments of loans in respect of top-up fees from graduates from EU member states working outside the UK; what estimate she has made of the likely total value of such loans in each year; and if she will make a statement.

Bill Rammell: The Student Loans Company will have the power to recover loans which are not recoverable through income tax in the UK, as a debt through litigation in the courts, if there is a breach of the terms. We anticipate relying on European Council regulation 44/2001 in support of this.
	We estimate that the annual resource cost of fee loans issued to EU students who would work outside the UK on graduation could be around £25 million 1 (steady state at 2006/07 terms). This assumes that 91 per cent. of EU students are charged the full £3,000 fee, 9 per cent. charged £2,000, 80 per cent. of them take out a fee loan and around 75 per cent. of EU students work outside the UK after graduation. The latter assumption has been derived from data on the first destination of EU students on graduation. This data indicates that a large proportion of EU students do not go into work on graduation, the majority of these undertaking further study. In the absence of any data about the eventual employment of this group of students, we have assumed that they all enter employment outside the UK and hence, the £25 million figure could be an over-estimate.

University Students (Counselling)

Ashok Kumar: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what changes to provision of counselling services for university students has been made to meet the changes in demand arising from broadening access.

Bill Rammell: Provision of Counselling Services is a matter for individual higher education institutions. Counselling Services in UK universities have responded positively to the changes in student populations resulting from the HE Widening Participation agenda. Government has supported a number of initiatives to improve all core support services to students, such as the "Developing Modern Higher Education Careers Services", report in 2001. A key focus of "Developing Modern Higher Education Careers Services" was the need to ensure greater and more targeted access to those students and graduates who might be disadvantaged and/or in need of support. The follow-up report "Modernising HE Careers Education—a framework for good practice" showed that universities had reviewed their provision of support services, and recognised the need to improve their standards of service.